Blackballing and the DAC Report...
#21
According to Swift's policy, that's exactly what you have - an Unsatisfactory Safety Record. Period. Swift isn't blackballing you for stating the FACTS in their report on you.
__________________
My facebook profile: http://www.facebook.com/malaki86
#22
Rookie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 33
It states on the Termination Papers, "Multiple Crashes", not "Unsatisfactory Safety Record". They could have listed Multiple Crashes on the DAC Report. Yet, they listed the other phrase, which they know causes other companies not to hire people. And, see, I've spoken with a lawyer that even said that the phrase, "Unsatisfactory Safety Record" is used because it's an Objective viewpoint statement. And, the Company knows that they can get away with it. However, if they were to put "Multiple Crashes" on the DAC Report, they would have to provide an exact account of what really happened. And, it would cause them to have to admit that their trainers were incompetant, which would cause them to have to acknowledge that they didn't abide by their own standards and policies. So, it's their way of getting out of any-and-all responsibility.
#23
try criegslist for jobs/truck driving. look for smale 5-10 truck companys, they mostly dont pull dac. dont tell company about theUnsatisfactory Safety Record on yr dac, dont lie to them. swift let you go becouse a miner unreportable acc/in a truck stop.
#24
Rookie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 33
I'll see what I can come up with and see how everything works out. Thanks for the advice.
#25
Really? Where does it say that? And, why do they have other drivers still on the road that have actually crashed trucks, destroyed trailers, and done far worse stuff than what I did, if that's their "so-called" policy? Because, nowhere on my termination papers did it state "Unsatisfactory Safety Record", as the cause of Termination. If they list it as one thing on the termination papers and then list it as something else on the DAC Report, then it is Blackballing.
It states on the Termination Papers, "Multiple Crashes", not "Unsatisfactory Safety Record". They could have listed Multiple Crashes on the DAC Report. Yet, they listed the other phrase, which they know causes other companies not to hire people. And, see, I've spoken with a lawyer that even said that the phrase, "Unsatisfactory Safety Record" is used because it's an Objective viewpoint statement. And, the Company knows that they can get away with it. However, if they were to put "Multiple Crashes" on the DAC Report, they would have to provide an exact account of what really happened. And, it would cause them to have to admit that their trainers were incompetant, which would cause them to have to acknowledge that they didn't abide by their own standards and policies. So, it's their way of getting out of any-and-all responsibility.
#26
Rookie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 33
The reason it says Unsatisfactory Safety Record on DAC is because DAC is a point and click entry. You can only enter what is availible. There is no option of Multiple Crashes. There is no option of freeform writing. As if that would make any difference. Each accident/incident is entered seperate by location,date,DOT recordable,and type. You had the accidents so how is that "blackballing"?
They could have left that blank, while still leaving the acc/inc on the DAC Report. But, instead, they chose to put it on under the heading, "Work Record". Therefore, when anyone that actually looks at my DAC Report, they assume that I am unsafe and a threat to other people on the road. That's why, it's considered misleading. Because, at NO time, was there anybody in danger, no freight was damaged, and all loads were delivered where they were going. But, people think the exact opposite when they see that phrase. However, I did everything possible to be as safe as possible, by sending in my GOALs and following all other company policies to the best of my ability. So, no, I'm not an unsafe driver, as that phrase leads people to believe. I made mistakes, just like pretty much every new driver out there did, at one time or another, when they were first starting out. And, the company that I was looking at getting hired by even said that minor trailer bumps happen out on the road, on a regular basis. But, it doesn't make a person an unsafe driver and shouldn't be considered that. Yet, that one phrase makes it sound worse than it really is. Last edited by lilchemmaster; 09-30-2012 at 12:18 AM.
#27
If there are accidents/incidents you can not leave it blank,enter other,enter satisfactory,ect. I don't think you know how the info is entered. And you are still trying to justify your actions.(no one was in danger,no freight was damaged,loads were delivered)
#28
Rookie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 33
It's what the company told me, as well. That phrase makes it sound as if I wasn't safe and that I was or will be a danger on the road, which is blatantly false!!! So, I don't have to justify nothing. I'm stating the obvious.
#29
Senior Board Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Redneckistan
Posts: 2,831
My My My... I was not going to respond to this discussion but then saw this little tidbit of idiocy. Lets all try and learn something from this shall we?
the conversation got changed, due to the praise for the company's bottom dollar, by Fozzy.
When there are so many trailers on the road that seem to have so much damage to them, it's hard to actually agree with your point. It appears that the money received from the insurance companies don't seem to go towards fixing any of the damage done, especially the minor scrapes. So, when I see the fixing getting done, I'll think as you do.
Instead, I'm thinking along the lines of companies holding their trainers accountable, instead of the students that don't get taught what they should.
Is it possible that there really are inadequate drivers out there, because of the stupidity, ignorance, and blatant disregard of the trainers to make sure that their student is capable of doing the job correctly?
Isn't it the responsibility of the companies to make sure that EVERYONE that is trained can do the job properly? Both answers are YES!!! Beside that, you have no idea as to what type of damage was done or any of the facts. You're basing your judgment on a generalization of protecting the company's bottom dollar, instead of reliability of the trainers to make sure proper training is done, so there is a far less amount of accidents, by newer drivers. Companies should be held accountable, as well.
__________________
http://agoldstardad.wordpress.com/
#30
Senior Board Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Somewhere between Rochester NY and Gaults' Gulch
Posts: 2,698
So if we could just change those three words. Do you think "unsafe to drive" or "will not rehire" or "can not back" would be any better? Of course not! I'm willing to assume you had a bad trainig situation BUT you still had 3 accidents in a short time, that is what's really keeping you from getting hired! The people that say they'd hire you IF DAC didn't have those 3 words are being nice to you but have real intention of hireing you. Sorry to be so blunt but thats tha way it goes.
|


